These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

39 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6867332)

  • 1. Analysis of mammography: a blind interpretation of BCDDP radiographs.
    Goin JE; Haberman JD; Linder MK; Lambird PA
    Radiology; 1983 Aug; 148(2):393-6. PubMed ID: 6867332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use and abuse of mammography in the early diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Mahoney L; Csima A
    Can J Surg; 1983 May; 26(3):262-3, 265. PubMed ID: 6850440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. MR Imaging as an Additional Screening Modality for the Detection of Breast Cancer in Women Aged 50-75 Years with Extremely Dense Breasts: The DENSE Trial Study Design.
    Emaus MJ; Bakker MF; Peeters PH; Loo CE; Mann RM; de Jong MD; Bisschops RH; Veltman J; Duvivier KM; Lobbes MB; Pijnappel RM; Karssemeijer N; de Koning HJ; van den Bosch MA; Monninkhof EM; Mali WP; Veldhuis WB; van Gils CH
    Radiology; 2015 Nov; 277(2):527-37. PubMed ID: 26110667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Guidelines for detection of breast cancer: an update on investigative methods. A report of the ad hoc committee on mammography of The Canadian Association of Radiologists.
    Hébert G; Carrier R; McFarlane DV; Charlebois S
    J Can Assoc Radiol; 1984 Mar; 35(1):6-13. PubMed ID: 6725372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The accuracy of mammography: an analysis of 655 histologically verified cases.
    Manoliu RA; Ooms GH
    Radiol Clin (Basel); 1977; 46(6):422-9. PubMed ID: 918299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial.
    Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Makariou E; Chan HP; Petrick N; Sahiner B; Lo SC; Freedman M; Adler D; Bailey J; Blane C; Hoff D; Hunt K; Joynt L; Klein K; Paramagul C; Patterson SK; Roubidoux MA
    Radiology; 2004 Apr; 231(1):208-14. PubMed ID: 14990808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The abnormal mammogram in women with clinically normal breasts.
    Sterns EE
    Can J Surg; 1995 Apr; 38(2):168-72. PubMed ID: 7728672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Factors associated with imaging and procedural events used to detect breast cancer after screening mammography.
    Carney PA; Abraham LA; Miglioretti DL; Yabroff KR; Sickles EA; Buist DS; Kasales CJ; Geller BM; Rosenberg RD; Dignan MB; Weaver DL; Kerlikowske K;
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):385-92. PubMed ID: 17242246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.
    Lynge E
    APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Early diagnosis of breast cancer: experience in a consultant breast clinic.
    Mahoney LJ; Bird BL; Cooke GM; Ball DG
    Can Med Assoc J; 1977 May; 116(10):1129-31. PubMed ID: 861862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases.
    Seigneurin A; Exbrayat C; Labarère J; Delafosse P; Poncet F; Colonna M
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 May; 127(1):221-8. PubMed ID: 20809364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis.
    Ciatto S; Houssami N; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Collini G; Del Turco MR
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Sep; 105(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 17115112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample.
    Beam CA; Layde PM; Sullivan DC
    Arch Intern Med; 1996 Jan; 156(2):209-13. PubMed ID: 8546556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Characteristics of breast cancer in an incident cancer population.
    Schmitt EL; Threatt B
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Aug; 143(2):403-6. PubMed ID: 6611076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Why? What next? And so what?
    Baines CJ
    Cancer; 1995 Nov; 76(10 Suppl):2107-12. PubMed ID: 8635008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Breast cancer and Oklahoma women.
    J Okla State Med Assoc; 1996 Oct; 89(10):375-6. PubMed ID: 8936856
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Diagnosis of minimal breast cancers in the BCDDP: the 66 questionable cases.
    Beahrs OH; Smart CR
    Cancer; 1979 Mar; 43(3):848-50. PubMed ID: 427726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mammography in the early detection of breast cancer.
    Marcus VL
    Nebr Med J; 1988 Dec; 73(12):355-7. PubMed ID: 3221933
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Nonchanging mammograms in proven carcinoma of the breast: additional cases wanted.
    Marx M; Forrest JV; Hilton S
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1982 Mar; 138(3):595. PubMed ID: 6978019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 2.